SUBHASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, namely, Subhash son of Nar Singh has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 452 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 09.02.2015(Annexure P-4), whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner for the release of Arm Licence No.657XP and .32 Kanpur made Revolver weapon. It is the case of the petitioner that FIR No. 165, dated 26.07.2010, under Sections 307, 332, 186, 353 read with Section 120-B IPC and Section 13/A/3/67 of the Gambling Act 1967, Police Station Sector-40, Gurgaon, was registered against him and other co-accused. The case was tried by ld. Addl. Sessions Judge and the trial Court vide judgment dated 20.10.2014 had acquitted the accused and has observed as under:-

(2.) Having been acquitted by the trial Court and for the reason that the arms licence and the weapon-in-question were ordered to be kept in the custody of police, the petitioner moved an application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the release of the arms licence and the weapon-in-question. The reply was filed by the police admitting the fact that no doubt, the petitioner has been acquitted by the trial Court but the petitioner had fired a shot on the police party at the time of his arrest and, therefore, weapon-in-question could not be released to the petitioner, as he is likely to commit the same offence again. Considering the aforesaid reply, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gurgaon, vide order dated 09.02.2015 declined the prayer of the petitioner for the release of the arms licence and the weapon-in- question. Presumably on the premises that an appeal against the order of acquittal has been recommended and it would not be advisable to release the weapon, which is otherwise is in the safe custody of the police.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that apart from the fact that there is no other case registered against the petitioner and the petitioner does not possess any criminal background, he had also been acquitted by the trial Court, vide judgment dated 20.10.2014.